1annette, Digital Marketing
COMPLAINT NUMBER 17/222
COMPLAINANT M Hanna
ADVERTISER 1annette ADVERTISEMENT 1annette, Digital Marketing DATE OF MEETING 13 July 2017
Advertisement: A pain erazer product advertised on the Trade Me website, http://www.trademe.co.nz, described the benefits of the electronic acupuncture pen for a variety of health issues.
The Acting Chair ruled the complaint was Settled.
Complainant, M Hanna, said: An advertisement for Pain Erazor on Trade Me makes a number of unsubstantiated therapeutic claims, in violation of the Therapeutic and Health Advertising Code Rule 2(a) and Basic Principle 3 of the Advertising Code of Ethics.
The advertisement also uses scientific terminology inappropriately, in violation of the
Therapeutic and Health Advertising Code Rule 1(d).
As such, the advertisement also falls short of the standards of social responsibility required by Principle 1 of the Therapeutic and Health Advertising Code and Basic Principle 4 of the
Advertising Code of Ethics.
The unsubstantiated claims and inappropriate uses of scientific terminology include: Treatment principle of Electronic Acupuncture Pen uses electrical pulses to stimulate acupuncture points, then to activate cell and dredging the channel
The advertisement also contains a number of images, including one that shows several people experiencing pain. The implication of this, particularly in the context of the product's name Pain Erazor (which I understand is itself outside of the ASA's jurisdiction), is that the product is able to effectively relieve pain.
There is no high quality evidence that the product is effectively able to relieve pain or treat any of the listed conditions.
The relevant provisions were Therapeutic and Health Advertising Code - Guideline
1(d), Guideline 2(a), Principle 1, Principle 2.
The Acting Chair noted the Complainant's concern that the listing on the Trade Me website
made unsubstantiated claims about the effectiveness of a pain erazer product.
The Acting Chair acknowledged the Advertiser had since removed the listing, upon receiving the complaint.
Given the Advertiser's co-operative engagement with the process and the self-regulatory action taken in removing the listing, the Acting Chair said that it would serve no further purpose to place the matter before the Complaints Board. The Acting Chair ruled that the matter was settled.
Acting Chai r' s Ruling: Complaint Settled